:wcm to Debate Politics!jfrancis said:According to FoxNews.com, on Wednesday, April 27, the House passed a bill that would make it illegal to dodge parental-consent laws by taking minors across state lines for abortions.
Bold statement, please PROVE that public support? You're inferrng that a majority of Americans agree with that statement, and I would like to know your source, please?jfrancis said:Due to the public support for parent's involvement in the decisions of their pregnant daughter's, the bill would impose fines, jail time or both on adults and doctors involved in most cases where minors were taken out of state to get abortions done.
That's not what anti-choice people believe, they want all abortions to be stopped, even if raped.jfrancis said:When dealing with abortions, we need to look at several different scenarios. First if the girl was rapped, and became pregnant, we should allow that girl to have an abortion.
You really think that the parents of the father should have any choice in this? You really think that the father should have any choice? That would be an outrageous violation of the woman's civil rights, and is completely unconstitutional. This law was created to supposedly prevent the father from forcing the woman to have an abortion, not to allow him to stop her. What you wrote is the exact opposite of what the bill's author intends.jfrancis said:But, if this is a minor that was just sexually active, and became pregnant and was not ready to have that child, then she should talk to her parents, the baby's father, and the baby father's parents, and together they should agree on a final decision on the life of that child. Minors should not be able to make such a major decision like this all by themselves. They should consult someone, but more importantly they should be able to consult their parents first, before going to anyone else.
With the extreme majority they have now, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Senate take it up this time. If they do, I think that they might have a harder time passing it than the house because Democrats would definetely fillibuster it if it looked like it was going to pass.26 X World Champs said:This was the third time since 1998 the House has approved the measure, sponsored by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican. The Senate has never taken it up and no vote has been set. FYI - More than 30 states have parental notification or consent laws.
That isn't necessarily true. Most I think believe that when rape and/or incest is involved then it should be allowable, but some don't.That's not what anti-choice people believe, they want all abortions to be stopped, even if raped.
Completely correct. It is unconstitutional because if those people have that much power over the girl (being the father, father's family) then that goes against her privacy wishes which were defined in Roe. However, requiring the parents of the girl to sign might not be considered unconstitutional per se, it just depends on how they set up the bill.You really think that the parents of the father should have any choice in this? You really think that the father should have any choice? That would be an outrageous violation of the woman's civil rights, and is completely unconstitutional. This law was created to supposedly prevent the father from forcing the woman to have an abortion, not to allow him to stop her. What you wrote is the exact opposite of what the bill's author intends.
26 X World Champs said:You really think that the parents of the father should have any choice in this? You really think that the father should have any choice? That would be an outrageous violation of the woman's civil rights, and is completely unconstitutional. This law was created to supposedly prevent the father from forcing the woman to have an abortion, not to allow him to stop her. What you wrote is the exact opposite of what the bill's author intends.
I agree - it is hard to find any flaw in your arguement.Rev. said:The father should absolutely have a choice! He contributed half of the biological material to make that baby, he should get some say as to what happens to it.
The whole "it's a woman's civil right to decide what happens to her own body" arguement is pure poppycock. The female babies that are being aborted are having their "civil rights" violated all the time. They get no say about what happens to their body.
That's not what anti-choice people believe, they want all abortions to be stopped, even if raped.
You really think that the father should have any choice?
That would be an outrageous violation of the woman's civil rights, and is completely unconstitutional.
This is the lesson of Spring Adams, an Idaho teenager who was shot to death by her father after he learned she was planning to terminate a pregnancy caused by his acts of incest. It is clear that when a young woman believes that she cannot involve her parents in her decision to terminate a pregnancy, the law cannot mandate healthy, open family communication.
Stinger said:Then should he be allowed to opt out of responsiblity for the child if he chooses not to be a parent?
shuamort said:In the case of incest:
This is the lesson of Spring Adams, an Idaho teenager who was shot to death by her father after he learned she was planning to terminate a pregnancy caused by his acts of incest. It is clear that when a young woman believes that she cannot involve her parents in her decision to terminate a pregnancy, the law cannot mandate healthy, open family communication
26 X World Champs said::You really think that the parents of the father should have any choice in this? You really think that the father should have any choice? That would be an outrageous violation of the woman's civil rights, and is completely unconstitutional. This law was created to supposedly prevent the father from forcing the woman to have an abortion, not to allow him to stop her. What you wrote is the exact opposite of what the bill's author intends.
Quite true, but, hypothetically speaking, let's say that her mother was gone. The girl wanted an abortion and since the father is in jail from incest/rape, who should be responsible for the choice? Should it still be the father's decision here?vauge said:I disagree - she should have went to the police after being raped by the father.
There was nothing healthy with the "communication" within this family.
shuamort said:Quite true, but, hypothetically speaking, let's say that her mother was gone. The girl wanted an abortion and since the father is in jail from incest/rape, who should be responsible for the choice?
Should it still be the father's decision here?
Yes, I do. In fact, that's what happens. They do retain parental rights unless the prisoner wishes to terminate them or the court deems it necessary.Stinger said:The same people who would be responsible for all parental decissions involving her life until she reaches the age of majority. You don't think people in prision for felonies retain their parental rights for children they cannot rear do you?
I might not think so and apparently you don't either. Other people may have different views.Stinger said:Of course not. Especially since he committed a crime against her. That's a no brainer what is your point in asking such an obvious question?
shuamort said:Quite true, but, hypothetically speaking, let's say that her mother was gone. The girl wanted an abortion and since the father is in jail from incest/rape, who should be responsible for the choice? Should it still be the father's decision here?
Rare or not, it still happens. Failure to make exceptions to the rules that some want to enforce are even more needed and need not punch holes in your argument as you're contending.Rev. said:For me, incest was not hypothetical. Nor was a pregnancy scare as a result of it.
And talking about allowing abortion in the case of incest is a real as fairy dust. It fails to address the REAL issue and is similar to offering antibiotic ointment to treat the hangnail of a multiple-trauma car crash victim.
First, the fact of real genuine incest is incredibly rare. While 1/4 of all women are sexually abused before their 18th birthday, the number of those instances that include father/daughter incest is a percentage of somewhere in the single digits (3% is the number that comes to mind from a college text I read LONG ago)
And you get the trophy for the most offensive thing I've read all month. Yeah, those silly 12 year olds that are raped by their fathers, they should have enough sense to try and stop it and if not, that's their fault.Rev. said:A child who is being sexually abused is not in a state of mind to make decisions that would be for her own good. If she could make that kind of decision, the abuse would not be continuing.
Wow, you're able to know the psychological make-up of every incest survivor. How warm is that blanket you're covering up the facts with?Rev. said:Abortion "in the case of incest" in actuality enables abusers to continue abuse. It disposes of the evidence. And a girl who gets pregnant through incest isn't going to have any more "emotional damage" through bearing the child. You can't damage devestation.
shuamort said:Yes, I do. In fact, that's what happens. They do retain parental rights unless the prisoner wishes to terminate them or the court deems it necessary.
I might not think so and apparently you don't either. Other people may have different views.
shuamort said:And you get the trophy for the most offensive thing I've read all month. Yeah, those silly 12 year olds that are raped by their fathers, they should have enough sense to try and stop it and if not, that's their fault.
Here's a case in Michigan that would reject that claim:Stinger said:No I believe the children are put into guardianship or foster home if no such guardian can be found and they would make such parental decissions.
shuamort said:Here's a case in Michigan that would reject that claim:
ADOPTING - TERMINATION OF RIGHTS - INCARCERATED NATURAL PARENT
In the Matter of Gabriel Allen Caldwell, Minor, Mich App (1997), #197219, 8/8/97
They continued, however, to make it clear that they disagreed with the Halbert holding and provided arguments as to why it should have been decided otherwise.
I thought that the question was whether or not people who were incarcerated on a felony lost their parental rights or not.Stinger said:That is the scenario that has been presented.
Stinger said:Third in this case the person is not being incarcerated for raping the child. If you can find a case where a parent raped a child and maintained their parental authority over that child I'd like to see it. That is the scenario that has been presented.
shuamort said:And you get the trophy for the most offensive thing I've read all month. Yeah, those silly 12 year olds that are raped by their fathers, they should have enough sense to try and stop it and if not, that's their fault.Rev. said:A child who is being sexually abused is not in a state of mind to make decisions that would be for her own good. If she could make that kind of decision, the abuse would not be continuing.
Wow, you're able to know the psychological make-up of every incest survivor. How warm is that blanket you're covering up the facts with?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?